Joel Bennett, the attorney for one the women who has accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment, said Friday that his client “made a complaint in good faith about a series of inappropriate behaviors and unwanted advances” from the GOP presidential candidate.

Bennett said his client sees “no value” in revisiting the issue now, but “stands by the complaint that she made.”

Bennett said his client would disagree with Cain’s characterization of the alleged harassment incidents.

He confirmed that the alleged harassment occurred in 1999 over a period of “at least a month or two.” There was “more than one incident,” he said.

The National Restaurant Association confirmed in a statement Friday that a woman working for the organization filed a complaint in 1999 alleging discrimination and harassment by Cain. Cain was president of the association at the time. The association and the woman “subsequently entered into an agreement to resolve the matter, without any admission of liability. Mr. Cain was not a party to that agreement,” the statement from National Restaurant Association President and CEO Dawn Sweeney said

Nice job Politico. You had second- and third-hand information from which you spun a tail of Herman Cain as an aggressor, you never even spoke to the original source, and now all we ever will know is your spin.

Here’s equivalent spin from The NY Times which pretends that someone refusing to back up her complaint with facts — even anonymously and even when released from a confidentiality agreement — means that she stood by her complaint:

Well, since we don’t know the details of the complaint, maybe she’s not lying. Perhaps her complaint simply was: “I want outta here — gimme some money or I’ll make a stink” and for whatever reason, they did.

I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt and that at the time she thought she had a valid claim.

SH cases still are so ambiguous as to when a crime has been committed. Which is why so many companies settle to make it go away. Case law is mixed and what laws there are can be interpreted many different ways. Eyes of the beholder and all that.

Still it does say something about the weakness of her case that she has decided not to air it.

I said before that if she was looking to do him damage this was the best way to do it if her complaint was weak.

And so we get another example of the double standard of the Major Media. Clinton can lie in court and it’s ok. Cain has a vague unsubstantiated CLAIM made and he’s guilty.

Although the final nails haven’t finished them off yet, the Major Media has built their coffin, dug the hole and are now putting in the lining before they lie down and get buried.

Since Obama got elected there is NO ONE who doesn’t see/believe that they act with a double standard.

She’ll be outed within 72 hours by someone other than the MSM, who will let it alone for perhaps 24 more hours. Then, her privacy and honor having been respected by the responsible, honorable, caring MSM, there will be a few harmless interviews by the evening talking heads who will then move on to Herman Cain for the duration. Confidentiality agreements in hand, she’ll do the rounds; morning talk shows, evening news magazines, cable “news” shows, the late-niters.

Not exactly a government job doing the people’s work
(sigh), probably much more stressful but it will pay a lot more.

Meanwhile, the boring stuff back in Washington; I wonder what tonight’s executive order will be?

Reading a statement he said he wrote jointly with his client, Bennett noted that she resolved the complaints through a financial settlement with the National Restaurant Association. He declined to say for how much, but POLITICO has reported it was approximately $45,000.

Bennett indicated that the woman, now a federal employee, enjoys her current post and doesn’t want to publicly recount her experience with Cain

My point, precisely. Her lawyer said so, but this isn’t going to go away. Don’t lose sight of the goal – Herman Cain. She is simply the path to get there; that cannot be changed. That said, her lawyer said others were harassed (involved?) so the attention may shift if one of them is willing to come forward. The only certainty is that it’s not over.

[…] basic point I made this morning: “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, Politico?”UPDATE III (RSM): Professor William Jacobson catches both Politico and the New York Times spinning the lawyer’s ridiculous press conference — at which he announced his client […]

This is the same woman who sexually harassed me. I remember her harassment, but I don’t want to talk about it. She settled with me for an undisclosed sum. Ask my lawyer, Snidely Whiplash. He can confirm that I don’t want to talk about it.